Apple has finally given a public nod to OpenStreetMap, almost two months after it began using OSM's mapping data within iPhoto for iOS. The OpenStreetMap team tweeted about the change on Thursday evening, noting that the app, which was updated earlier this week with relatively minor fixes, quietly gained an OSM mention in the credits.

When Apple began using OSM data in the iOS version of iPhoto in March, it came as somewhat of a surprise to both the world and even the OSM Foundation itself. At the time, the OSM said it was "pleased to find" Apple is using its data, though Apple continued to use Google Maps for other functions (such as the Maps app on iOS).

In March, the OSM Foundation pointed out that Apple had failed to include "the necessary credit to OpenStreetMap’s contributors," which has apparently been remedied. Although there wasn't much doubt that Apple was using OSM instead of Google Maps, Apple's acknowledgement shows the company is diversifying its sources when it comes to mapping data. When combined with Apple's acquisitions of C3, PlaceBase, and Poly9, it certainly appears as if the company is further distancing itself from Google, with which it has developed a tenuous relationship over intellectual property issues as of late.

Jacqui Cheng
Jacqui is an Editor at Large at Ars Technica, where she has spent the last eight years writing about Apple culture, gadgets, social networking, privacy, and more. Emailjacqui@arstechnica.com//Twitter@eJacqui

OSM on its own simply cannot the main map provider on any mobile platform without a "killer app" like Street View or Bird's Eye - something that provides a real-world view of the surroundings. For me, Street View is a big asset to the iPhone maps application. Apple could make good use of some of their cash by gathering such data on their own.

Open Street Map is an open project meaning that anyone from the lowliest scrub to the biggest company in the world (Apple, at the moment) can use it. As Happysin said, the only thing they did wrong is not properly atribute the data to OSM...which they have corrected.

Because that's the new thing to do now! Crap all over Apple. It used to be the Hipster company. Now it's more hipster to hate on it and like Microsoft's computers because it's ironic to like them and that's the hipster way!

Linux? Please...I used to like Linux before it got popular. Now I only use Windows 3.1. You've probably never heard of it...

Because, Apple engineers aught to have known that when using OSM, the condition is to acknowledge. That is not a mistake. That is a intentional omission. They didn't make a typo and accidentally incorporated OSM. It was a deliberate decision.

Because, Apple engineers aught to have known that when using OSM, the condition is to acknowledge. That is not a mistake. That is a intentional omission. They didn't make a typo and accidentally incorporated OSM. It was a deliberate decision.

Edit: Beaten by stagolee, but worth repeating.

So? Okay, they didn't say where they were getting their data. So? So the fuck what? Did OSM suffer catastrophic calamity because of this?

So now they acknowledged it. So? Will OSM now get bestowed with grace and great fortune because of it? Are Apple haters really picking on ANYTHING they can to throw at them? Seriously...WTF?

I guess what comes around goes around. It's the same thing that was thrown at Microsoft when they were the big dog on the block. There were idiots back then nitpicking on everything that MS did. Now Apple gets it. Nothing changes.

Technically, the OSM only "requests" attribution. The license requires that licensees "attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor". The licensor asked and Apple refused. The licensor did not "require". In the legal world of software, a "shall" has more rights than a "will" or a "may" - and definitely more than "pretty please".

Seems like Apple should have been a little more pro-active to give credit to other people, given how worried Apple is about making sure other people invent their own stuff.

I agree 100%.

It's a complete pooch-screwing. We can't chalk it up to a simple "mistake". They failed to provide appropriate attribution.

For the record, I'm an unabashed Apple fan.

--

It's also worth noting that the OSM maps look like biscuits and trash.

Maybe Apple can throw some design resources in their direction.

Rumor has it, they we're not only OK with not getting immediate credit, they actually asked for it to be phased in, so the system could handle the load. If apple ran out and said "Yo, we switched to this other group for maps" their server would have been slammed by the news. I'm sure as well, Apple had a huge hand in FUNDING all those new servers I'm sure they now need. I don;t recall this group ever coming forward and saying "yea, fuck apple, they never told us" they just stayed in the background.

I do hope they will step away from using any Google spyware services in their future iterations of software. Big names like Apple lend good credence to projects like OpenStreetMap.

Don't you mean, "Big name Apple was lazy and STOLE the work of a good project like OpenStreetMap."?

You can bet your sweet Apple-lovin' @$$ that if this was done to Apple, they'd be screeching lawsuit at the top of their lungs.

OSM is intentionally an open project. They only thing they did wrong was not properly give credit, which they fixed.

Yes. Only because they got caught.

Quote: "In March, the OSM Foundation pointed out that Apple had failed to include "the necessary credit to OpenStreetMap’s contributors," which has apparently been remedied."

Otherwise, Apple would have likely praised the Apple product as innovative.... despite essentially stealing someone else's work. If Apple was HONEST, they would have given the credit from the get go, since it says right on their homepage: "The data is free to download and use under its open license. Create a user account to improve..."

With a link straight to the license. But, oh well, let's forgive Apple its hypocrisy!!!!!

Sure, it might be have been a benign oversight (and I'm willing to accept that it was), but I don't expect rookie errors from huge companies with well-armed Legal departments.

This is the kind of error that opens companies to lawsuits.

The "unless otherwise authorized" clause in their licence is the key here. You know damned well Apple worked WITH them on this, and clearly and certainly there was an authiorization given outside this license. Their own statement on the leak of the data clarified they were working with apple to get that on there, so clearly they were aware before launch it would not be. Given the attention from apple, I'm sure they are MORE than happy to let apple have access to their data. They DO charge for the API btw, it;s not a not-for-profit group, they just provide the data free under certain terms. I'm sure they're being not only well compensated by apple, but also are generating a lot more interest in their fee-based bunsiness leg as a result.

I do hope they will step away from using any Google spyware services in their future iterations of software. Big names like Apple lend good credence to projects like OpenStreetMap.

If the alternative to Google's imaginary "spyware" is a product that looks like a 70s gas station map (which OSM does), I'll take my chances with Google, thanks.

Exactly. Ironic that they launch an iPad with the sharpest screen yet with blurry maps! They don't even go down to a decent level of detail at least, not where I was looking, perhaps other areas are different. Still, not as good as Google.

Because that's the new thing to do now! Crap all over Apple. It used to be the Hipster company. Now it's more hipster to hate on it and like Microsoft's computers because it's ironic to like them and that's the hipster way!

Linux? Please...I used to like Linux before it got popular. Now I only use Windows 3.1. You've probably never heard of it...

It appears as if there is a "Highway 1" crossing the Potomac in the Google map that is nowhere to be found on the Apple (OSM) map. It may be that the OSM data is somewhat older than the Google data? The comparative map sections above look as if the Google image was taken from a camera position zoomed out further than that seen in the OSM image--so that might explain it.

I do hope they will step away from using any Google spyware services in their future iterations of software. Big names like Apple lend good credence to projects like OpenStreetMap.

Don't you mean, "Big name Apple was lazy and STOLE the work of a good project like OpenStreetMap."?

You can bet your sweet Apple-lovin' @$$ that if this was done to Apple, they'd be screeching lawsuit at the top of their lungs.

OSM is intentionally an open project. They only thing they did wrong was not properly give credit, which they fixed.

Yes. Only because they got caught.

Quote: "In March, the OSM Foundation pointed out that Apple had failed to include "the necessary credit to OpenStreetMap’s contributors," which has apparently been remedied."

Otherwise, Apple would have likely praised the Apple product as innovative.... despite essentially stealing someone else's work. If Apple was HONEST, they would have given the credit from the get go, since it says right on their homepage: "The data is free to download and use under its open license. Create a user account to improve..."

With a link straight to the license. But, oh well, let's forgive Apple its hypocrisy!!!!!

I'm not a huge Apple fan, but I'm going to have to Occam's Razor this one.

1. Apple intentionally did not credit a free software product they're using for some nefarious and mysterious purpose, even though it costs them no money one way or the other.

2. Someone forgot to update the least-used part of their app, the About page.

Exactly. Ironic that they launch an iPad with the sharpest screen yet with blurry maps! They don't even go down to a decent level of detail at least, not where I was looking, perhaps other areas are different. Still, not as good as Google.

You do realize that you can add whatever you want to the map, right? It doesn't just miraculously show up out of nowhere. And the ugly look is all on Apple. Both the OSM default (Mapnik) and the Mapquest tiles look a heck of a lot better, although by no means perfect.

The "unless otherwise authorized" clause in their licence is the key here. You know damned well Apple worked WITH them on this, and clearly and certainly there was an authiorization given outside this license. Their own statement on the leak of the data clarified they were working with apple to get that on there, so clearly they were aware before launch it would not be. Given the attention from apple, I'm sure they are MORE than happy to let apple have access to their data. They DO charge for the API btw, it;s not a not-for-profit group, they just provide the data free under certain terms. I'm sure they're being not only well compensated by apple, but also are generating a lot more interest in their fee-based bunsiness leg as a result.

Where are you getting this from? There is no clear indication they worked with Apple on it. They don't charge anything for anyone as they just depend on donations. How are you sure Apple is giving them any money?

It's pretty much common practice to show where your mapping sources come from. Load Google Earth sometime, or Google Maps, or Bing Maps. They all list sources, and it even changes as you change layers/regions. It's term paper 101. Even I noticed that years ago, and I just mess around with these apps for fun (and work sometimes).

I question that it was an oversight, as iOS credits Google accordingly. I think Apple was hoping people wouldn't notice that they are leaving Google, because, while Apple may hate Google, most everyone else probably uses them as their search engine of choice. Heck, many probably think Google is the ONLY way to search the internets and might see the change as a feature reduction.